A sincere question for Catholics

[faithcontender]

Hi 3angelsmom,

What exactly is your question. I don't specifically know what you mean.

 

[Kathryn]

He is promoting ecumenical movement - a different type of approach in bringing all people under one church with the pope as the visible head.

Yep, that is what Jesus prayed for, that His Church would be one.

God Bless

And now I am not in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name whom thou has given me; that they may be one, as we also are.

While I was with them, I kept them in thy name. Those whom thou gavest me have I kept; and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition, that the scripture may be fulfilled.

And now I come to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy filled in themselves. I have given them thy word, and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world; as I also am not of the world.

I pray not that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from evil. They are not of the world, as I also am not of the world.

Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.

And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;

That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, as we also are one:

I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me.

Father, I will that where I am, they also whom thou hast given me may be with me; that they may see my glory which thou hast given me, because thou hast loved me before the creation of the world.

Just Father, the world hath not known thee; but I have known thee: and these have known that thou hast sent me. And I have made known thy name to them, and will make it known; that the love wherewith thou hast loved me, may be in them, and I in them. John 17:11-26

 

[BobRyan]

Thess -
I handle Elijah already.
Moses resurected before Jesus resurrection? Hmmm, thought Jesus was the first fruits

#1. God handled the Elijah situation in 2Kings 2:1,11 where we find that Elijah was "taken up to Heaven" by God. Explicitly in the text - no possibility of "changing it".

#2. Jesus raised people himself - see John 11 - before the cross. As did OT prophets.

Jude references the "Assumption of Moses" in Jude 9 - so no possibility of blaming Jude's endorsement on some demonination that you don't approve of.

So back to the point of Matt 17 - Jesus was not "bringing up the dead for a discussion" as you propose. It was the living speaking to the living. As Christ said in Matt 22 "God is NOT the God of the dead" speaking of Abraham's condition at the time of Moses. That can only be true - one way.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[thessalonian]

Originally posted by faithcontender:
I don't wonder why the cardinal said these things. He is promoting ecumenical movement - a different type of approach in bringing all people under one church with the pope as the visible head. In the past, the catholic Church use force to bring all people into one ruler. They burned the "heretics", make war with the muslims as their enemies. Now that the civilizations is enlightened, they are now using a different approach. They are now calling the "heretics" as separated brethren, muslims as brothers. What's behind this? Is the Catholic Church changing? Or are they just playing the game: If by force you can not win them, join them. Take note the pope still claim to be the universal pontiff, the vicar of christ, the "king of kings" the 'lord of lords".

For the same reason that Paul said what he did in Acts 17 about the tomb of the unknown God. Readi it. It's in your Bible.

 

[thessalonian]

Bob Ryan,

I am curious. 3Angels is an SDA. She openly denies the trinity now. How do you feel about that?
She said:

" don't read Ellen White, and neither does my husband. We read the Bible. Also, I have never even SEEN an SDA 'handbook'. We have a 27 fundamental beliefs of the SDA church book, but we have denounced the 2,3, and 4th ones because they support the trinity, so WHERE does that leave you?"

Is there any consequences for denying the trinity in the SDA religion? I would say that it separates her from Christianity. How about you?

 

[Carson Weber]

I DO NOT READ ELLEN WHITE, THERFORE, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT I GET MY DOCTRINES FROM HER. I READ THE BIBLE. <-----Period.

And I haven't read all of the councils' definitions and deliberations over the course of the centuries, yet it is not only certainly possible, but true that I get my doctrines from them.

You read the Bible with the lens of an adherent of White's SDA. To deny the SDA lens is like denying one's own ear in responding to a question one just heard. You need not have to read White to espouse her viewpoints. Her footprints have left deep impressions in those with whom you fellowship every Sabbath.

 

[DanielFive]

I haven't checked this thread for a couple of days, 'what a shock' to see that it has been turned into an examination of Kelly's faith as opposed to addressing the faith of Arinze the 'Pope in waiting'.

I would have thought the original article would have given catholics more to worry about than Kelly's faith.

Think I'll save myself some time by not bothering to read the last few pages. Call me a cynic but I would imagine the reporter, the newspaper, SDA, and Kelly herself have all been put under the spotlight and I'm pretty certain that nobody has come up with a feasible explanation for the quote.

God Bless

Enda

 

[Ray Berrian]

Pope John Paul seems to be balanced at least by Catholic standards, but this cardinal in question has my wife's parents upset. Their question is will this next Pope be as godly as John Paul? They are saying, 'Could this next Pope with non-orthodox views lead the church away from God? Could possibly the next Pope evolve into the feared Antichrist?

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by enda:
I'm pretty certain that nobody has come up with a feasible explanation for the quote.

I resent that. I stopped posted after it got off track, but before I stopped, I offered a fairly detailed examination of it. Please do not make such a sweeping statement when you admit you haven't read the whole thread. You can't be "pretty certain" of anything if you admittedly haven't read it all.

The only thing that shakes me is the fact that the author of the piece equivicated two unequivicable questions, and no one who is not Catholic seems to care about that.

God bless,

Grant

 

[Kathryn]

Pope John Paul seems to be balanced at least by Catholic standards, but this cardinal in question has my wife's parents upset. Their question is will this next Pope be as godly as John Paul? They are saying, 'Could this next Pope with non-orthodox views lead the church away from God? Could possibly the next Pope evolve into the feared Antichrist?

What is non-orthodox? This present Pope says the same thing. As far as if this next Pope will be as godly...... I will go by his confession of faith that Jesus Christ guides his life, and his confessing that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. I thought you guys believed in faith alone. Or is it that one has to believe in the doctrine of "faith alone"?


God Bless

[ June 21, 2003, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

[DanielFive]

Please do not make such a sweeping statement when you admit you haven't read the whole thread. You can't be "pretty certain" of anything if you admittedly haven't read it all.

Grant,

No offence intended, I read the first 3/4 pages of this thread and I have read just about every other catholic related thread postsed on here for the last 2/3 months.

I am pretty certain that, unless there has been a dramatic change around here in the last couple of days, no-one has come up with a reasonable explanation for the cardinal's statement.

Kathryn points out that he said something different in another article, this proves nothing. Less than 4 years ago I believed in the infallibility of the Pope,that certainly doesn't mean I believe in it now.

My parents and sister are still catholic, I have a lot of respect for the catholic people, but reading this quote and thinking about the implications of it has left me even more worried about their future within the CC.

I appreciate that as catholics you feel the need to defend your faith, thats quite understandable, the problem is that you seem to believe that those people who hold high office in the church should not be held accountable for anything they say. Are all Cardinals infallible, are they all above being challenged about this kind of remark.

I know that if I was still catholic, I wouldn't be happy with that quote, I wouldn't be trying to find excuses for it. My number one concern wouldn't be trying to defend it on a Baptist discussion board, I would be trying to get answers from the man himself. Why did he say it, was he misunderstood, did he mean what he implies in the quote?, these are questions that only he can answer, you won't find the answers on here.

This is a man who may well be the leader of the catholic church in a few years time, are you not concerned at all about that.

I have, since my last post read the posts on P7 of this thread, Kathryn provided a quote which ended with the following remark...

The Church is 'the world reconciled.' She is that bark which 'in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.' According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood" (CCC 845; cf. also CDF, Dominus Jesus, 20-22). Cardinal Arinze Oct 26, 2000

It seems to have gone unnoticed that this quote clearly implies that the Cardinal believes there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church. Here is gives the church the honour and glory that belongs to Jesus Christ alone.

Sincerely, if MY ETERNAL LIFE depended on a church that had this man as its leader then I would be seeking to have him clarify his position with regard to Salvation through Christ alone.

I hope this hasn't offended any of the catholic people on here, I and many others are genuinely concerned about where you and millions like you spend eternity, so please don't think that any posts attacking the RCC are in any way personal.

God Bless

Enda

 

[Kathryn]

Enda, you clearly have not read the thread. The Cardinal is quite consistent is all he has said, and with the teachings of the Church, and with the present Pope. He even said what the reporter said he said. You have chosen to believe what you believe without looking at the facts.

God Bless

P.S. It is a given you guys are going to claim he is the anti-Christ. Pope John Paul II has been the anti-Christ for you guys all these years. You have never accepted his confession of faith in Jesus Christ either. Goes with the territory. So much for faith alone.

[ June 21, 2003, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: Kathryn ]

 

[DanielFive]

It is a given you guys are going to claim he is the anti-Christ.

Just goes to show how little attention you pay to what people post on here. I have never suggeted that the Pope is the anti-christ, neither have I suggested that a future Pope will be the anti-christ. I dislike the fact that others do suggest this at times. In fact I have gotten into arguments with people on this board who are sometimes less than tactful in their approach to catholics.

Think before you post this kind of remark to me in future or you might find I will be less concerned about offending you.

Honestly Kathryn the more time I spend on here the more I doubt your sincerity. Obviously you disliked my last post but I think you'll find there is nothing really offensive in it. Perhaps it was the fact I picked up on the 'Noahs Ark' reference that you didn't like.

God Bless

Enda

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by faithcontender:
Hi 3angelsmom,

What exactly is your question. I don't specifically know what you mean.

The white stone, what do you think yours would say?

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by Carson Weber:
I DO NOT READ ELLEN WHITE, THERFORE, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT I GET MY DOCTRINES FROM HER. I READ THE BIBLE. <-----Period.

And I haven't read all of the councils' definitions and deliberations over the course of the centuries, yet it is not only certainly possible, but true that I get my doctrines from them.

You read the Bible with the lens of an adherent of White's SDA. To deny the SDA lens is like denying one's own ear in responding to a question one just heard. You need not have to read White to espouse her viewpoints. Her footprints have left deep impressions in those with whom you fellowship every Sabbath.

If that is the case, oh everwise, all knowing one, then through what lens was I looking when I studied the trinity (a doctrine held by SDA's) from the Bible, and came to my own conclusion that it is false?

Don't you have anything better to do with your time than to write jibberish that makes no sense?

 

[3AngelsMom]

Kathryn,

I really don't want you to waste anymore time on this. You seem to be going to great lengths to find quotes from the Cardinal to prove his sicerity, but none of that means anything in this discussion.

What you have continued to do is try to show us how great he is from his other statements without really adressing the one in my original post.

We understand that this man believes that Jesus is the 'way, truth, life', but that DOES NOT erase his statement that you CAN go to heaven without excepting Jesus.

What do you do with that? Unless I am mistaken, you are chatting with a bunch of complete strangers here, so be honest with yourself, and the rest of us.

What do you do with the statements that he HAS made that SHOULD be considered contrary to sound doctrine?

This post was in no way, shape or form intended to be offensive or sarcastic.

I truly do ask you this in all sincerity.

God Bless,
Kelly

 

[3AngelsMom]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Bob Ryan,

I am curious. 3Angels is an SDA. She openly denies the trinity now. How do you feel about that?
She said:

"I don't read Ellen White, and neither does my husband. We read the Bible. Also, I have never even SEEN an SDA 'handbook'. We have a 27 fundamental beliefs of the SDA church book, but we have denounced the 2,3, and 4th ones because they support the trinity, so WHERE does that leave you?"

Is there any consequences for denying the trinity in the SDA religion? I would say that it separates her from Christianity. How about you?

Yeah, they burned me at the stake for being a heretic last Sabbath, but I am not really dead, this is my disembodied spirit typing from purgatory. Apparently, I was good, other than that nasty heresy business, so they are letting me stay in touch with family and friends. It's nice, about 200 degrees in the shade.

 

[Kathryn]

We understand that this man believes that Jesus is the 'way, truth, life', but that DOES NOT erase his statement that you CAN go to heaven without excepting Jesus.

What do you do with that? Unless I am mistaken, you are chatting with a bunch of complete strangers here, so be honest with yourself, and the rest of us.

As previously posted, Cardinal Arinzi’s statement in his own words consistent with all his other words, consistent with the present Pope's words, and the teachings of the Catholic Church. :

But there are people who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church. They also are included in God's plan of salvation. There are, however, conditions. They must be sincere in their seeking of God. They must be open to the secret but real action of the Holy Spirit in them. They should follow their conscience in all matters of right and wrong. Because Christ has taken on human nature and somehow united himself with every man and woman, God can in ways known to him put people in link with the saving mysteries of Christ (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 22). He can give them the grace needed for salvation.

But to say that the followers of other religions can attain salvation under some conditions does not mean to ignore the fact that in these religions there ~re limits, errors and shadows. As St Paul says: "Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair" (Rom 1:21,25). This explains why the Catholic Church "painstakingly fosters her missionary work" (Lumen Gentium, 16) so that, becoming full members of the Church, people may have access to the fullness of the means of salvation, a fullness to be found only in the Church which is the ordinary means to salvation. The CCC therefore says: "To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is 'the world reconciled.' She is that bark which 'in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world.' According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood" (CCC 845; cf. also CDF, Dominus Jesus, 20-22). Cardinal Arinze Oct 26, 2000

God Bless

 

[DanielFive]

Originally posted by Kathryn

You have chosen to believe what you believe without looking at the facts.

Here are the facts as I see them..

1. Cardinal Arinze made the statement.

2. Nothing on this thread changes that or explains what he actually meant by it.

3. You are a confessed follower of a church that may have this man as its 'infallible' leader.

4. You appear to be unconcerned about this.

5. You have failed to provide evidence that the quote has been clarified or refuted by the Cardinal.

What conclusion can we arrive at , other than believing that he meant what he said, and that we should take the remark literally.

If we was leader of my church I'd want to know why he was happy to associate himself with an idolotrous Buddhist. What is going on in the Catholic Church, why aren't you people concerned, are you lovers of the truth or lovers of men?

God Bless

Enda

 

[DanielFive]

They must be sincere in their seeking of God

Seek and ye shall find.

Next.